Carbon XC Hardtail Frameset quandary.

Having been out of the sport for a long time - 10 years or more - I want to get back into it.

I've been trying to find a good deal on a pro level carbon XC hardtail, but aside from getting a good deal am pretty undecided. There are precious few comparisons by either magazines, websites or posts in forums.

Scott Scale 10 - Seems good, but I've heard question marks over the quality of fibre used (i.e. less than Giant / Trek). Relatively competitively priced. Very light. 5 year guarantee. Would consider the RC, but an integrated seatpost which has been cut is going to seriously affect resale values when I come to sell it.

Kona Kilauea - Very well priced. Lifetime warranty. Not much info and it's their first carbon bike.

Beone Raw - Not a lot of info. Appears to be lightweight and reasonably well priced.

Tomac X Type - Relatively decent price. Quite light. Not much info. Worried about the talk of a stretched position - not sure the geometry would suit me as i'm 6'1 and very leggy (short upper body), also I'm told it has a very harsh ride.

Diamondback RSL - Very expensive, though it appears to have a good reputation. Not really an option due to cost.

Re: FS - I'd consider a Carbon Scott Spark if I could get a really, really good deal. The thing is this will be my only bike and I'll be doing plenty of road riding for fitness initially. Also, there are large and incredibly steep hills that lead out of Bath (where I live in South West England). Not sure FS is really the best option in either of those scenarios.

To reiterate, I'd love to hear from people who have experience of more than one of these bikes, or the 3 less well known ones (particularly the Kona).

Re: FS - I'd consider a Carbon Scott Spark if I could get a really, really good deal. The thing is this will be my only bike and I'll be doing plenty of road riding for fitness initially. Also, there are large and incredibly steep hills that lead out of Bath (where I live in South West England). Not sure FS is really the best option in either of those scenarios.

To reiterate, I'd love to hear from people who have experience of more than one of these bikes, or the 3 less well known ones (particularly the Kona).

not to be pushy on this but FS designs have come a long way in the last couple of years. Many are very efficient with little to no discernible bobbing and such that would make you slower on climbs and used to scare away all the xc racers and especially the pros.

I love hardtails and I'm certainly not trying to steer you away from one, just making sure you have the whole picture

not to be pushy on this but FS designs have come a long way in the last couple of years. Many are very efficient with little to no discernible bobbing and such that would make you slower on climbs and used to scare away all the xc racers and especially the pros.

I love hardtails and I'm certainly not trying to steer you away from one, just making sure you have the whole picture

The bob doesn't concern me so much as an extra 2lbs to drag up a mile long 1:6 (with considerably steeper sections) climb

You've probably picked your carbon HT already, but just to say that the Tomac Type X is awesome. Had a go on an FS when in Aspen recently and hated it - wished I had my TTX going up the hills!!
I'm 6'5" and have managed to build mine up to sub 20lbs, so it rockets up the hills. Its also really comfy - although I suppose coming off an alu Zaskar, anything is comfy in comparison!
Hope this helps

2 lbs isn't enough to detain you from climbing a hill you would otherwise climb.I doubt you will notice them unless you are a pro.I believe it all depends on your priorities and your taste of course.If you live somewhere with pretty rough terrain trails then an FS would be well worth the toll of some little bob and weight.This given that you don't like to push yourself technically.Generally I believe you have to be riding in very mild routes or be very skilled in order not to be faster and more comfortable with an FS.JMHO.